I don't get Buddhism

Phyllo: Speaking for Moreno, as I very well can, what I notice is you not getting as stuck, as we all have been at some time or other, in the goop of his not responding or his not being clear or his attacking or his not making sense or his repeating himself for no reason or here, as you point out, merely insulting you (and not bothering to respond at all with any substance). So nice catch simply pointing out what is doing and not doing, rather than getting entangled in the muck.

Not getting entangled in the muck might be one way to describe Buddhism.

If something isn’t working, then I will try something else.

Although at this point, there may be nothing left to try.

Zinnat,
I am an extremely spiritual atheist.

If Vishnu or anyone else held in high esteem came to this world and taught “zero sum realities are shit”, this species would be a billion times better. These are all false gods! I know all the eastern religions (except Shintoism) came from India.

The dharma should have been, “zero sum worlds are shit, but while you’re here, reduce consent violation as much as possible”

Now wouldn’t that have started a REAL conversation in this species!!!

Nobody said that before me! I don’t claim to be the king or queen. I’d never in forever sit on a fucking throne. I’d never forever decide it’s a good thing to be eternally the ‘best’. I want everyone on my level, not simply to be better than. This is a hard task in this species.

I always tell people that their concept of god is what they’d be if they were god!

Never an equal, always prayer and worship. I’m trying to wake this species up and you’re not letting me!

Note to warrior monks of any and all denominations:

Describe examples of violence in your own life. Describe in turn how you intertwine violence on this side of the grave with that which you imagine as the fate of “I” to be on the other side of the grave.

As, finally, all of this might be understood by the hundreds and hundreds of religious warriors in other denominations. As it all might be encompassed in a philosophy venue with respect to the existential relationship between morality and immortality.

My own fascination of choice here and now given that I possess some measure of autonomy and accepting that what any of us think about all of this can only be wild ass guesses going back to an explanation for existence itself.

Oh, and link us to arguments and evidence that will serve to demonstrate that what you believe in your head is in fact true for all rational men and women.

Note to others:

Know any religious warriors? Persuade them to join us here as, to the best of our ability, we connect the dots being beingness and nothingness. As but infinitesimally tiny specks of existence in the context of all there is.

We’ll need a context of course. Stooge or not. :sunglasses:

MagsJ,

It looks to me that it is not me but you who needs a bit more clarity about karma and religions.

Let me take the intellectual issue first.
People often get it wrong but prophets are the most important parts of the religions, even more than respective Gods itself. That begs a question. Why so?

The answer is that it is not the gods but prophets who bring these religions in this world. It were Jesus and Mohammad who founded Christianity and Islam, neither God nor Allah by themselves. So, you have to believe the prophets first before believing the Gods and religions. It cannot be the other way around. There cannot be any Islam without Mohammad and neither any Christianity without Jesus. And, that applies to all religions. You have to believe the massanger first before believing in the dilevered massage. It would be illogical to claim that I believe only in the massage, not in the massanger.

The important thing to remember here is that if you follow this route and believe in the prophets first, you become religious by default. In the same way, if you are believing in karma and Dharma, you are accepting that what Buddha and Mahavira said about Karma is true. That makes you a religious person, whether you like it or not. Because, the concept of Karma has no place in pure western intellectual philosophy, it is an out and out eastern religious doctrine.

Secondly, other than Buddhism but in all other Indian religions, the concept of Karma goes beyond one life but spreads its jurisdiction to all previous and future incarnations. Now again, how one is supposed to be a irreligious and believing in incarnations?

MagsJ, unlike west, there is no pure intellectual philosophy or philosophers in the east, especially in india. All philosophers were religious scholars first, though they covered all non religious verticals also. Both of Kamsutra and Ayurveda were written by religious sages, not any medical professional.

With love,
Sanjay

Ecmandu,

Before replying me, you have to read my previous post addressed to MagsJ and consider it in your reply.

As I said there, the concept of spiritual atheist is oxymoron to me. An atheist cannot be spiritual in strict sence, unless you consider morality as spirituality, which is not logical. Moraliy is spirituality but only a part of it and does not cover spirituality completely. Means, one can be moral without being spiritual which is fine to me but being spiritual demands many others things also, of course including morality.

Not violating other consents is only morality not spirituality, unless you explain me otherwise.

Let me ask you one thing.
Think of a child suffering of diabetes. As we all know that it is not right for parents to let him have cakes and pastries but he continues to demand these.

Now, what should the parents do? Either they shoud reject the demand of the child to have more sweets because of his heath condition or should allow him having more sweets in order to honour his consent?

See, understanding and decoding even the morality is not as simple as only not violating others consent. That would not be enough. Spirituality is even more complicated.

With love,
Sanjay

It violates the child’s consent to have diabetes in the first place.

I deal with voices and possessions on a daily basis. I meet gods on a regular basis. I have no choice but to believe in gods and spirits. But, my mind is tough. Anyone less than me would believe what my life has been would believe in god, that it was god interacting with them. But I had a very simple revelation through all this demonstration of power, if I were god, reality would not violate consent or even be zero sum in nature (winners and losers), and so I balked at the spirit world. I’ve seen things that would certainly turn anyone else into a theist. But, then again, my mind is tougher than that. The illusion never got to me as it does to the weak minded.

Sure, and yes.

Amen brother.

Fixed Cross,

“Amen brother”. That’s the best you can do for zinnats idiocy…

I’ve been to hell. I took the entire wrath of the god you call god and I’m still fucking standing. There are not many people who’ve ever lived on earth who can do that.

When zinnat states that Spirituality is more complicated than nobodies consent being violated, he sounds mentally fucking retarded!

I was actually in hell. I know that of which I speak. Zinnat just thinks it’s some kind of joke “pfft Consent violation smialation… what a laughable thing! Spirituality is complicated man!” Fuck you assholes! Life is very simple. This is how I survived hell… I made friends. I made sense to lots of people. I taught that consent violation is the only problem in existence. I taught that you have to regret all of your memories stretching back to forever because god fucked up so bad (making a zero sum existence) Slowly, slowly I crawled out of hell… you make a spiritual friend here, a spiritual friend there, next thing you know… gods in the hotseat…

This was my next reply to zinnat, which you avoided:

viewtopic.php?p=2772311#p2772311

Have you considered toning it down … avoiding words like idiocy, fucking and retarded?

I’ve been tormented in hell for much longer than you recall your life. I survived shit you can’t even comprehend. I know what happens when people talk like you guys. Tormentors talk like you guys. I’m not just protecting myself from you, I’m trying to protect you from yourselves. There aren’t words in the human language to speak about not only the degree of threat you pose to others, but also to yourselves.

The way you talk makes life crappier for other people than it has to be.

Do you think that Zinnat likes the way that you describe him and his posts?

How do you think he feels when he reads your posts?

Ecman is AWOL. Everybody knows that.

I know how he feels. He feels like the cocky, pompous , self righteous cloud he sits on is being undermined.

I need people to understand… if one single being in all of existence is having their consent violated, god is evil. My words are a joke compared to hell.

The point is that you don’t have to use those words.

In fact, people may be more open to what you are saying if you don’t use those words.

From my life experience (which I don’t really expect people to have). Zinnat is a flaming asshole. Preaching the praises to and sucking up to the supreme consent violator. Extra senses are common in the human species, even some strange ones.

What zinnat is saying is actually meaner and more aggressive than what most people say. Being in hell for so long, I’m finely attuned to it.

There are some people who only understand force, otherwise zinnat might spend the rest of his life abusing people. That’s unconscionable to me.

I’ve resurrected at least 3 times, I’ve been to hell for a long time… I’m an extremely sensitive person to slight abuses being massive to the regard zinnat is using them.

Fundamentals of Buddhism: Morality
From the BuddhaNet web site

Mountain climbing? That’s the example used in order to explore the existential relationship between human suffering and Buddhist morality?

Why not instead the summit being Buddhist morality and abortion or just war or animal rights or suicide or the right to bear arms?

If you are a Buddhist and your life begins to revolve around, say, acknowledging that you are a homosexual, what might the summit be construed as here? What behaviors might be deemed to be either enlightened or benighted? By the Buddha himself. Or suppose you are either a homosexual or a heterosexual and you find yourself feeling attracted to a fourteen year old. But: A very precocious fourteen year who is mature beyond his or her years. A fourteen year old willing and able to consent to sexual intercourse with an adult.

In other words, reconfigure the assessment above into a context of this sort such that the steps you take morally to the summit are in sync with that which you would want the fate of “I” to be on the other side of the grave.

Iambiguous,

I always tell people…

The goal of philosophy is not to learn how to die. The goal of philosophy is to learn how to live forever.

As much as death scares people! Living forever scares them more! What’s even worse than that is that people don’t ‘invest’ in forever. They invest in like 200 years max, maybe in their great, great grandchildren!